Friday, February 19, 2021

Looking to the Future

Chances are if you've known me for a while, you know that my favorite movie is (and probably always will be) Back to the Future. (I've written about it a few times.) When I heard that a new board game based on it had been released (and heard from a few places that it was actually good), it was inevitable that sooner or later, I would try it.

Back to the Future: Back in Time is a cooperative game for up to four players. You're collectively given a limited number of turns to accomplish three important tasks in 1955 Hill Valley: move your time-traveling DeLorean to the main town street facing the clock tower, gather the three pieces of equipment you'll need to power the machine, and make sure that George McFly and Lorraine Baines fall in love. You must achieve all these goals even as Biff roams around town making trouble, and a variety of complications pop up to make things harder.

It's likely my expectations for this game were raised too high; the truth is that many licensed games miss the mark, and I'd certainly be hoping for a lot from this game -- this license -- in particular. To be clear: this game is far from a dud. But I did find it something of a mixed bag.

First, some items in the plus column. The game is a challenge. You start out feeling far behind, wondering how you could ever possibility succeed in getting all the goals done in time. It requires a high degree of coordination between players, with each of the four characters having a specialty that will contribute to the mix. The game has a nice arc to it. You build powers quickly, and what seems impossible early on becomes reasonable as you acquire special cards with unique powers to stretch the rules. Even still, the tension of feeling you might lose really doesn't ebb until the final few turns (unless you really are going to lose).

In the middling column, I'd put the game's flavor. Mileage will vary here for different players, of course. I'd put myself on the more forgiving side -- put a few well-chosen nods to the license into the game and I don't mind you hand-waving the rest. Make a good game, first and foremost, I say. And the game does put its fair share of fun movie references in there, mostly in the form of the special items you can acquire during play -- a radiation suit, a Walkman, a comic book, and so on.

But in order to support four players, (necessary but) dubious flavor choices are made right at the top level. The playable characters are Marty, Doc, Jennifer (whose specialty is helping Lorraine and George fall in love?), and... Einstein (whose specialty is... driving the DeLorean??). Yes, I'm glad this isn't limited to a two-player game. But I do wonder if there was some world in which specific players didn't have to portray specific characters, so that there weren't two clear "also rans" in the mix with such clearly wedged-in-there game effects.

(Side note: there's also a fun bit of flavor in turning the movie's iconic clock tower into a dice tower you use to roll dice in the game... but the fact that it sends them jetting out onto the game board where it can mow down the pieces moves this fun element into the "mixed bag" category for me.)

On the negative side, I'm not convinced there's much replayability to the game. The tasks the game sets before you are always the same: gather the parts, unite the lovers, get the car to Main Street. There's a little variation in the hazards you face along the way, but the order you problem solve doesn't change like in Hogwarts Battle, the places you most need to focus your efforts don't change like in Pandemic... the challenge feels to me like it's going to be substantially the same every time you play.

I could see playing Back to the Future: Back in Time every now and then as a nice change-up to whatever cooperative games your play group normally enjoys. But I don't see it becoming the new "first choice" in the genre. I give it a B-. Fans of coop games will likely want it in their collection, but I don't personally feel like I need to be the one in my circle that owns it.

No comments: